Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default Do the Police Have to Investigate a Complaint Before Making an Arrest

    My question involves civil rights in the State of: California

    My question involves police conduct in the State of: California
    An old associate of mine had a personal vendetta against me. Accused me of threatening to kill him. A detective and two uniformed police came to my house and asked if they could come in. I said yes believing they were there to talk to me about his actions. The detective pointed one of the uniforms around the corner. He looked down the hall into my room where I had just dumped my laundry and said this place is a mess. The detective told me to put my hands on my head and they pointed a taser at me then arrested me. They did not show me a search warrant and did not have a warrant for my arrest. The person that made the accusations has a laundry list of fraud cases and breach of contract against him that span 20 years in the county. 27 cases to be exact. Do they not consider the source when someone makes such serious claims? I have a taped admission that he coerced his girlfriend to lie to the police and say I was harassing her. Years later I contacted her to find out how it was possible the police came into my house without a warrant and arrested me without a warrant or probable cause. She told me it was because he was friends with the head of the sheriffs department and that they were both crooks. Wouldn't that be considered police misconduct, conspiracy and/or civil rights violations? Considering that this was new evidence to prove wrongdoing would the Statue of Limitations if there is any have toiled? One of the two uniforms told my neighbor he didn't know if they were going to take me in when he and his girlfriend were told to get the @#$# out of my house. If they had a warrant or probable cause the cop would have known they were going to arrest me. Also they never read me my rights. I believe this is a violation of my fourth amendment. Unlawful Search, Seizure, Detention and warrantless arrest. To top it off the chief of police who he was friends with went down for federal charges and is already in prison. I sent the information to the IAD and they called and asked what I was going to do with the information. Due to the trauma I went through and nightmares etc I haven't been working and have very limited resources so I have not taken any legal action. I do believe there is no statue of limitations on this and if I can find an Attorney that is willing to file the case it would be settled on the spot due to the electronic proof. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    15,076

    Default Re: Do the Police Have to Investigate a Complaint Before Making an Arrest

    Quote Quoting caljack
    View Post
    My question involves police conduct in the State of: California
    An old associate of mine had a personal vendetta against me. Accused me of threatening to kill him. A detective and two uniformed police came to my house and asked if they could come in. I said yes believing they were there to talk to me about his actions. The detective pointed one of the uniforms around the corner. He looked down the hall into my room where I had just dumped my laundry and said this place is a mess. The detective told me to put my hands on my head and they pointed a taser at me then arrested me. They did not show me a search warrant and did not have a warrant for my arrest.
    They did not need one. You gave them permission to come inside and I presume they made an arrest based upon probable cause to believe you had committed a felony (likely criminal threats per PC 422).

    The person that made the accusations has a laundry list of fraud cases and breach of contract against him that span 20 years in the county. 27 cases to be exact. Do they not consider the source when someone makes such serious claims?
    That will be hashed out in court. The DA may also take into account when deciding if he or she can prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. If the victim has some serious credibility issues, they may decide not to prosecute. On the other hand, those 27 accusations may amount to nothing because perhaps his accusers were full of it. Who knows?

    If it gets to court, your attorney can do what he can to make the victim/witness look like an unbelievable sot.

    I have a taped admission that he coerced his girlfriend to lie to the police and say I was harassing her. Years later I contacted her to find out how it was possible the police came into my house without a warrant and arrested me without a warrant or probable cause. She told me it was because he was friends with the head of the sheriffs department and that they were both crooks.
    Apparently she has never heard of the concept of "probable cause" and is not familiar with CA Penal Code section 836.

    Wouldn't that be considered police misconduct, conspiracy and/or civil rights violations? Considering that this was new evidence to prove wrongdoing would the Statue of Limitations if there is any have toiled?
    I thought you said you were arrested for threatening this guy? Provided they made the arrest in a reasonable time after the probable cause was established, they can do so without any problems. If they delayed long enough to have gotten an arrest warrant, then the arrest might be bad, but you'd still likely have to face the charges anyway.

    It would be misconduct if they had acted falsely, illegally, against policy, or conspired to break the law in some way. You haven't provided anything that indicates this has occurred.

    One of the two uniforms told my neighbor he didn't know if they were going to take me in
    He doesn't have to tell the truth to the neighbor. Plus, f based on probable cause, it is very possible that the assisting officer did not KNOW for sure what was going to happen, only that an arrest MIGHT occur.

    Also they never read me my rights.
    About 9 out of 10 arrests will never require Miranda rights.

    Miranda is generally only required when they interrogate you after you are in custody. If they do not interrogate you after they arrest you, then there is often no need to read you your Miranda rights. And if they did NOT Mirandize you, then your attorney can move to suppress any statements made after you were cuffed (provided they were not spontaneous utterance and the like).

    I believe this is a violation of my fourth amendment. Unlawful Search, Seizure, Detention and warrantless arrest.
    Your attorney can look into that. But, from what you have written, I don't see it. They had a complaint regarding a serious violent felony, they asked you if they could come inside, you agreed, and they made the arrest based upon that probable cause. Pretty standard fare unless you left out some important details.

    To top it off the chief of police who he was friends with went down for federal charges and is already in prison.
    Since the ex chief is in prison, I'm pretty sure that he had nothing to do with this.

    I sent the information to the IAD and they called and asked what I was going to do with the information. Due to the trauma I went through and nightmares etc I haven't been working and have very limited resources so I have not taken any legal action. I do believe there is no statue of limitations on this and if I can find an Attorney that is willing to file the case it would be settled on the spot due to the electronic proof. Any advice is greatly appreciated.
    Yes, there IS a statute of limitations on civil actions. How much time has passed since this happened? Have you been charged with any crime from the arrest? What do you believe are your grounds to sue?
    A Nor Cal Cop Sergeant

    "Make mine a double mocha ...
    And a croissant!"


    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,276

    Default Re: Do the Police Have to Investigate a Complaint Before Making an Arrest

    police only need probable cause to effect an arrest ... probable cause may or may not require an investigation ..

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Deprivation of Civil Rights: False Arrest or Kidnapping After Complaint of Police Misconduct
    By tjvisner in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-15-2012, 09:56 AM
  2. Police Conduct: How to Make the Police Re-Investigate an Incident
    By m_deka in forum Police Investigations
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-05-2011, 05:14 AM
  3. Embezzlement: Embezzlement, but Police Won't Investigate
    By GulfCoastKid in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-07-2011, 11:39 AM
  4. Police Failed to Investigate
    By Dgcooper in forum Police Investigations
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-10-2009, 04:56 PM
  5. Disciplinary Issues: Can a Police Department Investigate an Officer Without First Receiving a Complaint
    By oc10spray in forum Problems at Work
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-10-2005, 01:10 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 
Forum Sponsor
Criminal Defense Attorney
Protect your freedom. Consult a criminal defense lawyer for free.




Untitled Document